China Set To Launch First-Ever Spacecraft to the Far Side of the Moon, Will Attempt To Grow Plant There (scientificamerican.com) 138
AmiMoJo writes: Later this week, China plans to launch its Chang'e-4 spacecraft to the far side of the lunar surface. The aim is to land a rover on the dark side of the moon for the first time. Blocked from direct communication with the Earth, the lander and rover will depend on China's Queqiao communication satellite launched in May. If the landing is successful, the mission's main job will be to investigate this side of the lunar surface, which is peppered with many small craters. The lander will also conduct the first radio astronomy experiments from the far side of the Moon -- and the first investigations to see whether plants will grow in the low-gravity lunar environment.
The ultimate goal of the China National Space Administration (CNSA) is to create a Moon base for future human exploration there, although it has not announced when that might happen. Chang'e-4 will be the country's second craft to 'soft' land on the lunar surface, following Chang'e-3's touchdown in 2013.
The ultimate goal of the China National Space Administration (CNSA) is to create a Moon base for future human exploration there, although it has not announced when that might happen. Chang'e-4 will be the country's second craft to 'soft' land on the lunar surface, following Chang'e-3's touchdown in 2013.
On the dark side? (Score:2, Funny)
How will it grow with no sunlight?
Re:On the dark side? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the dark side of the moon gets more sunlight than the side that faces Earth.
Then why is it dark?
Perhaps because it only faces the sun at night.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:On the dark side? (Score:5, Interesting)
Being that, from time to time, the Earth blocks light from the sun to the moon (a lunar eclipse), the other side gets more light.
I don't think so. Lunar eclipses occur so infrequently that the total amount of light blocked is inconsequential.
Meanwhile, the nearside gets "earthshine": reflected sunlight from the earth. The earth is much bigger than the moon, and the albedo of earth's clouds is much higher than lunar regolith, so earthshine on the moon is much brighter than moonshine on the earth.
Ergo, the nearside gets more light.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, the dark side of the moon gets more sunlight than the side that faces Earth.
Then why is it dark?
Because the Pink Floyd album The Dark Side of the Moon [wikipedia.org] was extremely popular.
Re: (Score:3)
Then why is it dark?
Perhaps because it only faces the sun at night.
Technically it's not "dark side" but "far side", just people's habits are hard to change and it's not like the only language imprecision out there.
Re: (Score:2)
It's dark as in unknown or unexplored, or at least was unknown. Like darkest Africa.
Re: (Score:2)
I think we can settle to "far side" as scientific term and "dark side" as a poetic term.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that sounds best.
Re: (Score:2)
"Actually, the dark side of the moon gets more sunlight than the side that faces Earth.
Then why is it dark?"
It's a Pink Floyd Trademark.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, the dark side of the moon gets more sunlight than the side that faces Earth.
Then why is it dark?
Perhaps because it only faces the sun at night.
It's dark, as in unknown.
Anyway, in the sun would instantly fry the plant without tremendous cooling, so shadow with heater and artificial light is needed.
Testing growth in low gravity is largely pointless. Of far greater interest is how much nutrient needs to be added for successful growth in lunar soil (in above containment unit.)
For that matter, will plants grown in lunar soil be hopelessly impregnated with millions of micro shards, all very sharp like glass, which never got worn down by erosion, unlike
Re: (Score:2)
Given that the moon always has the same side towards Earth I assume that a Moon day will be about a month.
It would be interesting to see if there is anything that would grow under those conditions.
There are some high points near the poles that have constant sunshine. This is also close to polar ice deposits, so it is a perfect spot for a moon base [space.com].
Polar sunlight on earth is weakened by atmospheric diffusion. That is obviously not a problem on the moon, where even at the poles the sun is at full intensity, about twice as bright as on earth.
Re: (Score:2)
'matter of fact, it's ALL dark.....thump thump....thump thump....thump thump.....
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure that the inside of the moon is pretty dark, actually.
Speaking of which, whatever became of that lunar cave they discovered from lunar orbit? Was any probe ever sent to explore it?
Re:On the dark side? (Score:5, Informative)
The "dark" side of the moon is the one that's tidally locked to point away from the earth. It gets the same amount of direct sunlight (although less total light, because it doesn't get reflected earth light.) It has more small craters because it gets hit more often (although the earth doesn't shield it that much) by meteorites.
TL;DR dark meaning unknown or mysterious, not dim.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
If it was called The Far Side of the moon then there would be an inordinate number of Cows and Chickens there. An entirely different experiment!
Re: (Score:1)
How will it grow with no sunlight?
You're kidding, right? It's called the "Dark Side" because *we* never see it, it doesn't mean the sun never shines on it.
#Science
Re: On the dark side? (Score:2)
It seems like a dumb name because English is goofy. The word "dark" has a half dozen different meanings depending on context; anything from "unlit" or "unreflective" to "hidden", "malicious", "angry" or even "inactive".
In reference to the moon, "dark" means "hidden" or "unexplored" rather than "without light". That's why Africa used to be referred to as "The Dark Continent" back in the early days of English imperialism. It's not like people thought the continent didn't receive sunlight ...
Interestingly e
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: On the dark side? (Score:2)
+1 this thread needed that. Also, why not shrooms? My bets are they would do better in space, the whole structure of a plant is based on holding it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Pink Floyd fans will go up there with grow lights.
Re: (Score:2)
As the summary says the far-side.
Despite what certain progressive rock bands would have you (metaphorically) believe there is no "dark side of the Moon".
I predict a series of accidents. (Score:3)
No way they'll succeed. The secret moon base on the far side of the moon will blow up that spacecraft before it gets close. Gotta make it look like an accident though!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On the plus side they may see some of the ships lost in the Bermuda Triangle before detonation.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1... [imdb.com]
Moon ganja (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They're planning on growing the same plant they were smoking when they came up with this idea.
Well, at least they'll be smoking 100% genuine space weed.
Good Job Slashdot (Score:2)
Good job, you guys appear to be actually learning!
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing to do in near space.
Mining the gas giants for hydrogen fuel.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Ah, nope, Mars 3 of the soviets did the first ever soft landing on Mars. It stopped working within seconds after landing, but it did land successfully. Not much compared to success of later Viking 1 lander, but they did get that first landing milestone. Sort of like posting "First!" on Slashdot, not much content, but at least it's the first one.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There was a dust storm in the area, which may have affected the electronics. The dust storm was known about via Earth telescopes, but these particular probes had no ability to hang out in orbit to wait out a dust storm.
At the time, it was also speculated that it sank in something akin to quicksand. In case the same thing happened to the upcoming Viking mission, the Viking cameras were programmed
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully this will start a new space race, and focus the US on kicking ass in space. We're the only ones to successfully land on Mars, but we shouldn't get lazy and stop boldly going where... Dammit. ST:TNG marathon is what I'll be doing now.
I'll settle for the replicator and the holodeck, you can have the warp drive.
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully this will start a new space race, and focus the US on kicking ass in space. We're the only ones to successfully land on Mars...
That's not true at all! Plenty of probes sent to Mars by other countries successfully land on Mars. The only difference is that their probes land much faster and in more pieces. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully this will start a new space race, and focus the US on kicking ass in space. We're the only ones to successfully land on Mars...
That's not true at all! Plenty of probes sent to Mars by other countries successfully land on Mars. The only difference is that their probes land much faster and in more pieces. ;)
Oh, I see. You think they forgot to define success criteria.
Re: (Score:2)
Explaining the joke doesn't make it funnier. -_-
Re: (Score:1)
Hopefully this will start a new space race
The manned moon missions ate up ungodly amounts of funding and did very little science in return. It was awe inspiring, to be sure, but we need to be smart with our spending. We already spend plenty on space telescopes, probes, and landers.
Re: (Score:2)
Its quaint that you think after all that has happened that the US will be any sort of player by the year 2100. Your nation was built with the free labour of slaves, and propped up mid century by being geographically isolated from europe during the second world war.
The new super power is quite obviously china. No surprise since you sold them and outsourced all your tech there.
My God, it's full of stars! (Score:1)
are they sending Matt Damon as well ? (Score:1)
it's going to need fertiliser.
Re: (Score:2)
Nooo... (Score:2)
The far side of the moon is where Sam Bell's clones are mining helium-3. It's already been claimed.
How will success be known if no communication? (Score:1)
Send out some auditors? A "take my word for it" kind of thing?
Re: (Score:2)
If there's no communication with the far side of the moon, how will they know if the plant is growing?
Well duh, they'll wait to see the roots breaking thru the near side. Then it's time to transplant and re-pot.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: How will success be known if no communication? (Score:2)
You should have probably read the whole summary instead of stopping after two and a half sentences.
At least you could have read three sentences.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Considering the way China behaves overall, I wouldn't put it past them, though, to establish a 'colony' (read as: fortified military base) on the Moon, then try to claim the entire Moon as Chinese territory.
Re: (Score:3)
Remind me how many far away lands with no historical Chinese identity China has laid claim to, compared to say the USA or UK. China has shown little interest in being even a global military power, their interests are simply the South China Sea and Taiwan and other small islands they've long laid claim to but not had the power to assert the claim before.
If there were a reason to militarize space, you can bet the USA as the world's arms dealer would've done it already. The reason there's no military installat
Re: (Score:2)
Remind me how many far away lands with no historical Chinese identity China has laid claim to, compared to say the USA or UK. China has shown little interest in being even a global military power, their interests are simply the South China Sea and Taiwan and other small islands they've long laid claim to but not had the power to assert the claim before.
If there were a reason to militarize space, you can bet the USA as the world's arms dealer would've done it already. The reason there's no military installation in space is that it makes no tactical sense. It makes your weapons more visible than they are on the ground, and it takes a hell of a lot longer for the weapon to hit the Earth target if you launch it from the moon than if you launch an ICBM from your home country.
Historically, yes... and you can include many other Europeans nations in that equation too. Of course the main difference is, when there is a territorial dispute nowadays they let the people living there decide. Tibet, Eastern Turkistan, Taiwan, etc, and other occupied regions wish they had that freedom. Noone living on the moon currently of course- and it wouldn't surprise me it nations did try to divide it up amongst themselves by setting up bases and declaring territory theirs... treaties against th
Re: (Score:2)
This is only true if you are using missiles for weapons.
What about using a super-hig
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's an International agreement in place for a long time now 'preventing' such a thing from happening, but that only works if every nation on Earth continues to honor it, it's not like it's a binding agreement in any way shape or form.
Considering the way China behaves overall, I wouldn't put it past them, though, to establish a 'colony' (read as: fortified military base) on the Moon, then try to claim the entire Moon as Chinese territory.
US has already proposed breaking that treaty by starting up the Space Cadets military branch that Trump already proposed. Besides, that, the Black Bird could be considered "militarizing space".
Re: (Score:2)
the Black Bird? The 1960s era reconnaisance aircraft that didn't go to space? No, that was not an instance of militarizing space.
Anyone remember "Earth: Final Conflict"? (Score:2)
Fucking bamboo will grow anywhere (Score:2)
Definitely Bamboo [imgflip.com]
NASA used a HUGE flash when they took this picture (Score:2)
When they land... (Score:2)
The first picture sent back by the Chinese lander will contain a sign reading "This spot reserved for Elon Musk's Tesla" and a set of tire tracks going to the horizon.
(yes I know the Roadster was not sent to the Moon...)
Seems like a long way to go (Score:2)
Seems like a long way to go just to grow some pot. Should just come over to Canada where it's legal now.
Re: (Score:3)
Ask Tibet! When the Chinese arrive in your country they don't tend to leave.
Nazis! (Score:2)
Oh please, we all know that their REAL missions is to make contact with the secret Nazi base built on the dark side of the moon.
I mean, hasn't anyone watched Iron Sky?
Re: (Score:2)
"Oh please, we all know that their REAL missions is to make contact with the secret Nazi base built on the dark side of the moon."
Indeed. Hopefully the Chinese won't take an iPad Pro to the moon or we're all doomed.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
It will be harder for anyone to spy on a base on the far side of the moon and doing so would come at a higher cost.
Re: (Score:2)
Explain how you come to that conclusion.... why do you think that the far side of the moon would be any harder to spy on than the near side? What about the far side of the moon makes it any more difficult for satellites to fly over?
Or do you somehow think that we'd ordinarily try and monitor things on the lunar surface from the ground here on earth using optical telescopes or something?
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't mean that the original post made much sense though. I'm not sure what kind of secret activities you'd conduct on the moon that you couldn't just as well conduct in a secret lab on earth.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously, but even putting that aside, it still makes no sense at all how having something on the far side would supposedly make it any more difficult to spy on it than something on the near side.
Well the comment about secret bases on the moon was tongue in cheek based on the cliché of secret moon bases... but absolutely it would be much harder to spy on.
The US has a space spy plane that is capable of going beyond the moon but no one else does. There are no satellites or any other space craft that come with in line-of-sight of the far side (and even other electromagnetic signals would be harder to spy on due to the mass of the moon). The near side of the moon can easily be spied upon by satel
Re: (Score:2)
My argument is that any intention to spy on even the *NEAR* side of the moon would involve no less of an expense, and so putting a base on the far side would not pose any greater of a barrier than any other situated lunar base.
It's not like you can spy on the moon from the ground or hell, even
Re: (Score:2)
My argument is that any intention to spy on even the *NEAR* side of the moon would involve no less of an expense, and so putting a base on the far side would not pose any greater of a barrier than any other situated lunar base.
It's not like you can spy on the moon from the ground or hell, even in earth orbit.
I think you're highly underestimating technology, and it depends on the level of spying that is involved. It's much cheaper and easier to put a satellite in orbit around the earth than around the moon. With no atmosphere around the moon and a powerful lense from an earth orbiting satellite you could definitely see basic structures being built, maybe judge activity too and fro the building (which buildings are being docked with), you could monitor for electro magnetic signals. A lot of this could probably
Re: (Score:2)
I think you are overestimating optical acuity.
The absolute *maximum* that we could resolve even from very high earth orbit is at best something that is no smaller th
Re: (Score:2)
And I think it's important to point out that this limit is not technological but physical. At a certain resolution you start running into Heisenberg's uncertainty principle which causes refraction to increase as you focus more precise.
Re: (Score:2)
> The US has a space spy plane that is capable of going beyond the moon but no one else does.
Uh... citation?
There's this little thing called google that was invented a few years ago... this isn't exactly secret knowledge (google or the spy plane) - how about you give it a try?